BTW - I am NOT calling you out on you dislike of Muslims because to me the only good one is a dead one.

I disagree strongly.

I agree with you, rakovsky. That "only good one is a dead one" remark was an awful thing for him to say.

Harmless internet posturing, like his statements about Putin.

Logged

Quote

But it had not been in Tess's power - nor is it in anybody's power - to feel the whole truth of golden opinions while it is possible to profit by them. She - and how many more - might have ironically said to God with Saint Augustine, "Thou hast counselled a better course than thou hast permitted."

I remember as a girl wearing hats and gloves outside.Then suddenly, out went the hats, gloves, and modesty.Worse, the wearing of underwear became acceptable.

Seriously, my guess is that Maria meant people wearing just underwear.

On closer "inspection", LOL, I think what she means is that silk skirts and halter tops are underwear, and that wearing them as the outermost layer of clothes became acceptable.

Quote

In came the mini-skirts and hot pants.Worse, the wearing of underwear became acceptable. For example, women wear thin silk skirts (formerly slips or petticoats) and camisoles or halter tops.I remember in high school, that wearing mini-skirts, hot pants, halter tops, and camisoles were grounds for expulsion.

It sounds like she is correct, since the things she lists in bold can be worn as underwear, and at least some varieties of those things have become acceptable in places like college campuses where they might not have been in the past.

I do wish to say that I think it is better if women cover their heads in Church because St Paul said so. Just as priests and deacons dress a certain way, in my opinion, women should wear headcovering and men should take off their hats in church.

I understand the current reasoning common among Orthodox Christian leaders that it's OK because St Paul was writing in a different time period, and that today, women wearing headcovering isn't disrespectful.

Personally I disagree with this reasoning- obviously even in St Paul's time he had a choice on the issue, and maybe some women at that time preferred going without head covering. In fact, for a trend to change, some people, like those women, must do things differently and others must copy them. Logically, St Paul would've disagreed with this trend spreading. Besides, St Paul's own reasoning wasn't based on just "social mores" or what "people think is acceptable." He didn't say "This is what is socially acceptable, so we do this." Actually, Christians shouldn't hold themselves or strictly enforce social mores because they are what's common. Instead, St Paul based his reasoning on what he saw as the inherent biological natures and roles of men and women. He saw the head covering issue as a matter of what is itself pleasing to God, not what is pleasing to society.

Outside of church though, for me it isn't so important. I should add that about 90% of the women in my home parish (OCA) now don't have any head covering, and most of them are over 55. I would say that's how it is at most OCA parishes. I doubt you can force them to do this, and I think it's better they at least come to Church, which is more than alot of people do.

If we just base everything on "Well, people had different attitudes then", then when it comes to other important issues, we could end up changing ourselves based on what the larger society changes to consider acceptable.

I want to add that it's a hard issue, and isn't a matter of the church becoming more liberal or something. For example, my impression is that the early Church was often more pacifist and anti-death penalty (St Ambrosius) than some of its members (St Augustin, perhaps) later showed themselves to be. In that case, the Church integrated more into the Roman Empire, which was more military oriented, and those influences may have crept in more. To give another example, the overarching totalitarian role played by the Pope of Rome over other patriarchs may have been acquired and influenced later by the Roman Emperor's role within the larger society.

Balthasar: Do not lose hope in our leaders because of a stupid comment by one bishop. Bishop Bishoy is only one of many leaders, and there is no indication that he is fated to be elected to the papacy anyway. Notice how his comment has caused many Copts to rise against him, especially women.

Thanks, dear dzheremi! Of course, I won't lose hope, in fact, I do believe that there are many wonderful church leaders out there -- but sometimes it's frustrating not to feel their presence when the Christian world is facing the most challenging and difficult times in recent history. I used to appreciate Bishop Bishoy for openly telling the truth, when he said, "Muslim Arabs are guests in Egypt". It's a fact that they are guests, better said, invaders. And the Copts either need this sort of fighting spirit to protect their faith and country, or accept evil Islam or leave Egypt.

Everyone should try to do the following: As you know, Google has a wonderful tool called Google Trends , now, go ahead and click it as it will open in a new window. Essentially, this tool allows you take a word or phrase and see the search volume for it with respects to countries and/or cities. At the top of the page type in a word (sorry for bringing these words ) like, "sex" and click search. Look at the results and you’ll notice that 6 out of 10 are Muslim countries with Pakistan leading the way followed by Egypt, Iran, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey. It gets better, type in "anal s**" and you’ll see the top 2 spots belong to Saudi Arabia and Turkey! How about searching on "f***", you’ll see Iran and Pakistan way ahead of everyone on this. Go ahead and do another one, "ass f***" and you’ll notice Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Iran in front of everyone.

Muslims are proud of their strict beliefs as they feel it gives them the moral high ground, and this is exactly what they really have: EMPTY satanic PRIDE. Hypocrites and perverts!! The world would be better off without the followers of Islam which by itself is the very embodiment of the spirit of antichrist.

Hadith, Bukhari Volume 1, Book 2, Number 28: Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:

“The Prophet said: "I was shown the Hell-fire and that the majority of its dwellers were women who were ungrateful." It was asked, "Do they disbelieve in Allah?" (or are they ungrateful to Allah?) He replied, "They are ungrateful to their husbands”

Daniel 11:37 – 38 gives us some clue to the likes of Muhammad, the fake prophet.

“Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself above all. But in his estate shall he honor the God of forces: and a god whom his fathers knew not...“

Thanks, dear dzheremi! Of course, I won't lose hope, in fact, I do believe that there are many wonderful church leaders out there -- but sometimes it's frustrating not to feel their presence when the Christian world is facing the most challenging and difficult times in recent history. I used to appreciate Bishop Bishoy for openly telling the truth, when he said, "Muslim Arabs are guests in Egypt". It's a fact that they are guests, better said, invaders. And the Copts either need this sort of fighting spirit to protect their faith and country, or accept evil Islam or leave Egypt.

I am an outsider, of course, but one of the things that strikes me about Coptic history as I have read it (by people in the church like HH Pope Shenouda III, Fr. Tadros Malaty, Idris Habib El Masri, etc.) is that the people have been very shrewd when faced with decisions like this. They have accepted what needed to be accepted and rejected what needed to be rejected in order to keep their faith. This is why statements like the one of Bishop Bishoy really confuse me, because it doesn't seem necessary to me to say things like what he has said about Coptic women. As I've written, Christian examples and Christian modesty are enough, so there's no need to tell women to follow Muslims in anything. And likewise I think there is no need to start fights for the sake of protecting the faith. The Muslim Arab knows, deep down, that he is illegitimate with regard to his "Egyptianness", as Egypt was quite plainly conquered and forced into conformity with Islam over a long process which saw the destruction of its traditional identity for all but those who steadfastly refused to accept Islam, the vector of Arabism. This is why it is traditional for the leaders to pay homage to the Coptic Pope at least since the days of Nasser (who made the first concentrated effort to remake Egypt as an Arab country politically, rather than simply linguistically). They need the legitimacy that comes along with recognition of the past that specifically excludes them, so that they can feel free to remake it in their image. Saddam Hussein and the Baathists did the same in Iraq, when they used to sponsor traveling exhibitions of Assyrian antiquities in rural villages to show the villagers (who mostly didn't know better) the great heritage of "Iraq", the fake, artificial entity built atop the might that was Beth Nahrain (Mesopotamia/Assyria).

Given this reality, I think it is best to have the kind of quiet determination that the Copts have always had, which can be loud when it has to be but mostly sticks to its own prerogatives, as is needed to live out the Gospel in a harsh environment (after all, the pre-Muslim/Arab days of Diocletian et. al. were no picnic, either). We cannot really turn back the clock on the Arab invasions, but history has shown that the Copts have a faith that can move mountains when necessary, and we know that Muslims do not (the best they can hope for, I guess, is to conquer the mountain by force and then feel content with themselves for having done so...), so who will really lose in the end? A preemptive fear of "losing the country", so to speak, has resulted in that feared outcome materializing when Christian people have seen fit to arm themselves with a sense of superiority relative to their Muslim or otherwise non-Christian neighbors. In the Middle East, you need look no further than Lebanon for an example of that (where the Christian minority was lost about 1977, well into the war). The Copts know better, praise God.

This again? Seriously, I think you guys are obsessed with accusing people of devil worship.

While I am not going to do what Balthasar has suggested (I've already read articles about how porn-hungry Pakistani and Saudi Googlers are, and I definitely don't need such terms in my search history!), I do not think it is a wild accusation to say that Islam worships the devil. The individual, everyday Muslim, of course, has no direct say in the matter, as the majority in the Middle East were not converted recently and hence have never had any realistic choice to be or know anything else, since of course leaving Islam is just not an option on a social/political level (Muhammad having said, as per the Hadith, that whoever changes his religion from Islam is to be killed).

This does not change the fact that Islam is built upon a denial of God, the only God who is -- Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in the undivided and uncreated Holy Trinity. This is the God of our Fathers, and if you have trouble seeing that those who reject Him are worshiping something else I can only tell you to stop reading CCC 841 and pick up any of the preexisting very old commentaries on the heresy of Islam by the likes of John of Damascus and Dionysus Bar Salibi. These men had no trouble calling a spade a spade, and the Western Christian world could use some of that spirit itself, as it finds itself being engulfed by masses of Muslims and their useful idiots ever ready to praise the blasphemy of Muhammad. Don't be one yourself.

This is the God of our Fathers, and if you have trouble seeing that those who reject Him are worshiping something else I can only tell you to stop reading CCC 841

If you're feeling lonely, don't. Turns out there are high-level Catholics who see satanism all over the place just like you do. For example, Fr. Gabriele Amorth, exorcist of the Diocese of Rome, said "practising yoga is satanic, it leads to evil just like reading Harry Potter".

This isn't about Satanism or yoga, but nice try, Peter J. I'm sorry that you are wedded to a church that believes in popular monotheism and other moronic idiocies, but that's no reason to compare me to one of your looniest priests for the entirely reasonable suggestion that you read some of the historic writings of the Eastern and Oriental Christians who have actually lived in Islam-dominated societies before deciding that everyone who insists that Islam is evil is somehow an extremist. That's a low blow, my friend.

You're the one making the low blow dzheremi. It isn't about Satanism? That's exactly what we're talking about, Satanism and devil worship. This is the post you responded to in the first place:

Actually it wasn't about literal Satanism/devil worship until you made it so. Balthazar simply accused muslims of 'satanic pride'. 'Satanic pride' is a farily common *Christian* term (East or West) for overweening pride--as 'pride' was the sin which caused Satan's fall, it is associated with him more directly than any other sin. 'satanic pride' is like 'Herculean strength', 'olympian heights, 'Solomonic wisdom', etc.

For it were better to suffer everything, rather than divide the Church of God. Even martyrdom for the sake of preventing division would not be less glorious than for refusing to worship idols. - St. Dionysius the Great

You're the one making the low blow dzheremi. It isn't about Satanism? That's exactly what we're talking about, Satanism and devil worship. This is the post you responded to in the first place:

Actually it wasn't about literal Satanism/devil worship until you made it so. Balthazar simply accused muslims of 'satanic pride'. 'Satanic pride' is a farily common *Christian* term (East or West) for overweening pride--as 'pride' was the sin which caused Satan's fall, it is associated with him more directly than any other sin. 'satanic pride' is like 'Herculean strength', 'olympian heights, 'Solomonic wisdom', etc.

When I responded to Balthasar's post, I wasn't aware (but I am now) that satanic has more than one meaning, and hence doesn't necessarily refer to satanism. So I apologize to Balthasar for misinterpreting his post; needless to say, I wouldn't come on this thread and say that Muslims aren't satanist, just for the hell of it, unless I thought someone was saying that they are satanist. Nevertheless, since that's what dzheremi was responding to,

This again? Seriously, I think you guys are obsessed with accusing people of devil worship.

While I am not going to do what Balthasar has suggested (I've already read articles about how porn-hungry Pakistani and Saudi Googlers are, and I definitely don't need such terms in my search history!), I do not think it is a wild accusation to say that Islam worships the devil.

etc.it's clearly bad form for him to then turn around and say that "This isn't about Satanism".

When I responded to Balthasar's post, I wasn't aware (but I am now) that satanic has more than one meaning, and hence doesn't necessarily refer to satanism. So I apologize to Balthasar for misinterpreting his post;

Add to that, I don't want to give anyone the impression that Fr. Gabriele Amorth, exorcist of the Diocese of Rome, was necessarily referring to satanism when he said "practising yoga is satanic, it leads to evil just like reading Harry Potter". (Although that does appear to be how some interpret his statement:

Quote

“It’s a theory — if one can call it a theory — that is totally without foundation. Yoga is not a religion or a spiritual practise. It doesn’t have even the slightest connection with Satanism or Satanic sects.” Giorgio Furlan, the founder of the Yoga Academy of Rome, said yoga had nothing to do with religion, “least of all Satanism.” “Whoever says that shows that they know absolutely nothing about yoga,” he said.

This does not change the fact that Islam is built upon a denial of God, the only God who is -- Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in the undivided and uncreated Holy Trinity. This is the God of our Fathers, and if you have trouble seeing that those who reject Him are worshiping something else I can only tell you to stop reading CCC 841 and pick up any of the preexisting very old commentaries on the heresy of Islam by the likes of John of Damascus and Dionysus Bar Salibi. These men had no trouble calling a spade a spade, and the Western Christian world could use some of that spirit itself, as it finds itself being engulfed by masses of Muslims and their useful idiots ever ready to praise the blasphemy of Muhammad. Don't be one yourself.

To best understand the 'limits' of Islam, we have to compare it with Christianity... which as we know is the fulfilment of man's spiritual progression. When God first revealed His true nature, He showed He consisted of virtue and gave the Jews the moral laws. When the time was ripe, God gave us the fuller vision of Himself with the incarnation of His Son Jesus Christ. With Christ's passion, God showed us that virtue was more than just a set of do's and don't's, and that it was a love so pure as to be incomprehensible.

We know this fuller vision of God was rejected by the Jews, but Mohamed decided to go one step further. He wanted a god that would endorse his personal quest for world domination. His god had to be one that would impose his 'superior' cultural beliefs on everyone else. This is why it's inconceivable to the Muslims that their all powerful militant God, would die the ignoble and humiliating death of crucifixion.

For one to unite with God in His Kingdom, they too must become like Him, so since our God consists of Pure Love, we too have to obtain that love. Mohameds god though consists of militant triumphism, so this is what the Muslims honor and aspire to.

To me the strangest thing in Islam, is how the Muslims honor the Virgin Mary for conceiving Jesus without a spouse, and yet they will not accept Jesus as the Son of God. Where is the rationale in that?

This topic has me torn in two. I agree with everything Dzheremi said, but my initial response was the same as Hebte Selassie.

I don't like the idea of looking up to any UnOrthodox person when we have so many wonderful examples inside our church, but I'm not upset with Bp Bishoy for his comment. I think he was just speaking in simplicity and in love. I don't know.

This is the God of our Fathers, and if you have trouble seeing that those who reject Him are worshiping something else I can only tell you to stop reading CCC 841

If you're feeling lonely, don't. Turns out there are high-level Catholics who see satanism all over the place just like you do. For example, Fr. Gabriele Amorth, exorcist of the Diocese of Rome, said "practising yoga is satanic, it leads to evil just like reading Harry Potter".

BTW, concerning Muslims, I never said that I agree with CCC 841.

First of all I have the greatest respect for Fr. Gabriele Amorth. He had the courage to restore exorcisms back into the Catholic Church. As for Yoga, I think there are two forms, one with a spiritual component to it and one without. The spiritual one would of course lead to satanism, since anything that is not of our God, has to be of another god.

As for Harry Potter, if he arouses an interest in magic and the supernatural in children, that would lead to the occult. I think it all depends on how much influence Harry has on their lives.

When I responded to Balthasar's post, I wasn't aware (but I am now) that satanic has more than one meaning, and hence doesn't necessarily refer to satanism. So I apologize to Balthasar for misinterpreting his post; needless to say, I wouldn't come on this thread and say that Muslims aren't satanist, just for the hell of it, unless I thought someone was saying that they are satanist. Nevertheless, since that's what dzheremi was responding to,

This again? Seriously, I think you guys are obsessed with accusing people of devil worship.

While I am not going to do what Balthasar has suggested (I've already read articles about how porn-hungry Pakistani and Saudi Googlers are, and I definitely don't need such terms in my search history!), I do not think it is a wild accusation to say that Islam worships the devil.

etc.it's clearly bad form for him to then turn around and say that "This isn't about Satanism".

Com'on Peter...you know better than this. Even if you don't know the difference between "Satanic pride" and "Satanism", certainly you know the difference between "Satan" and "Satanism". To say that someone worships the devil (especially in the context of talking about other religions) is not the same as saying that they follow Anton Levay and all that stupid stuff and actually do "Satan worshiping" or whatever like actual Satanists would.

Far be it for me to understand how holding your intellect in high regard is insulting or provoking you, but as you wish, Peter J.

Sorry, I get a little impatient sometimes. I guess the point is, satanism was the topic of discussion, regardless of whether it was brought up by Balthasar or by me. You can't just change the rules in the middle of play, and it's particularly annoying when you do it to put words in my mouth.

BTW you've apparently forgotten that you actually supported my interpretation of satanic as "of or pertaining to Satanism" (as opposed to "of or pertaining to Satan") when you initially responded:

This again? Seriously, I think you guys are obsessed with accusing people of devil worship.

While I am not going to do what Balthasar has suggested (I've already read articles about how porn-hungry Pakistani and Saudi Googlers are, and I definitely don't need such terms in my search history!), I do not think it is a wild accusation to say that Islam worships the devil.

In a different thread, I made the point that Early Christian women wore modest clothes, wore head coverings, and stated that many EO Christian women did this, but many did not. Some Orthodox synods agree, where some do not... (Scriptural issue too).

I was argued with pretty severely from some on this forum, when the issue was between different groups of the Orthodox. I posted examples of every Orthodox Christian woman and the Theotokos in the icons we have, as having modest clothing and head coverings.... Then somebody (an Orthodox Christian) even posted a magazine cover of a Playboy magazine, along with Muslim women, etc.

So I find it ironic... but anyway -

This bishop, I did not see him comparing the Virgin Mary to Muslims. I think he was speaking of how the Muslim women wore these modest and faith filled clothes and that they follow their faith. Then he mentioned the role models for the Orthodox women.

Women should be in modest clothing, and wear head coverings while praying, and pray without ceasing. I believe the bishop was right, but jumbled the context. Kind of hard to see the Theotokos and Muslims in the same paragraph though... But I don't see the big deal.

It is true when Bishop Bishoy says that St. Mary, St. Demiana and others wore modest clothes. This should be enough of an example for our Christian sisters and daughters, shouldn't it? Comparing Christian women unfavorably to Muslims is insulting, and helps to perpetuate a sense of inferiority in the Christian community. Neither Islam nor Muslims are better than us. We should not imitate the Muslims in anything, as our own Christian saints and history are certainly enough for us, without invoking the seeming piety of the blasphemers, heretics, and heathens who may have this or that rule. What does that have to do with us? Nothing. Their Qur'an and Hadith from which these behaviors come are not our sources of law or conduct, and do not come from God, so they are useless and it is frankly foolish to appeal to them or those who follow them. What is next...Christians should look to Muslims also in saying their prayers? I do not think Bishop Bishoy has done himself or his community any favors with a statement like this, regardless of how much "buzzing" it has generated. It was a foolish thing to say.

Intentions may be one thing, but the fact of the matter is that there is no fellowship to be had concerning this matter (in the sense of shared interests or goals) with Islam or Muslims. As Shanghaiski has just pointed out, the reasons for the Muslim's "modesty" are quite different than the Christian motivations, and they in turn have vastly different realizations. This is not an accident. This is by design. They are not supposed to be as we are and we are not supposed to be as they are. I would give anything to stop this attraction to the false piety of Islam on the part of our laypeople, so how then can I approve of it coming from our bishops? What HH did with Muslims was for patriotic and pragmatic reasons (the Copts and the Muslims share the same Egypt, after all), not to put Muslim modesty and morality on a pedestal as Bishop Bishoy seems to be doing with a foolish statement like the one he has made. There is no real comparison between the two. Our good Christian sons and daughters deserve guidance that calls them to observe modesty and purity of heart in accordance with our own religion, not that of the followers of a delusional blasphemer and his false revelation. What accord has Christ with Bilal, remember? As I recall, the allusion is none. And so it is true!

The Muslims are not following our beliefs, though. That is the entire reason why Bishop Bishoy is wrong in invoking their example. Or are you saying that Bishop Bishoy has the average Islamic apologist's understanding of how our faith relates to Islam such that if Muslims wear the hijab and St. Mary also covered, then Muslims are "better Christians" than Christians are? Because that is an argument I have heard from Muslims in favor of Islam, and may God help us all if that is what Bishop Bishoy is getting at! (But I don't think it is, or else he would not have included that St. Mary and St. Demiana also dressed modestly. All I'm doing is being baffled at why, since that is the case, he felt the need to include Muslims at all. Again, Christian saints for Christian people, and if Muslims want in too, let them put away their blasphemies and join the truth faith. Or is that too "unloving" of me, to want for them the greatest thing that a person can have?)

Quote

Further, in drawing upon examples from Muslims, I understand you're upset that HG is choosing to overtly legitimize Islam as an example, but in the same light it seems HG is only following HH legacy and example of humanizing relationships with our Muslim neighbors.

No. Just no. Unless you have a particular statement at the ready in which HH Pope Shenouda III advises Christian girls to follow Muslims, then you are way over the line here. We are not talking about some generic humanization of relationships with Muslims (as though HH or HG would need to do that! Are Muslims not humans already?), but about the actual substance of the statement that Christian girls should look up to Muslim women and imitate them. Please stick to that and if you can find anything that says that in HH's speeches and writings, okay. If not, do not make any more false equivalencies for the sake of making yet more kumbaya posts about Islam, and dragging HH's blessed name through the mud in the process. If HH's loving and prudent actions towards Egyptian Muslims show us anything, it is proper Christian behavior toward that community: Love without compromise. Not, as HG Bishop Bishoy's statement seems to have it, compromise for the sake of doing what Christians should be doing anyway.

Quote

Throw a little cool water on all that hotta fyah, for the fyah is not partial, not even to them that burn the fyah. And if all of us are going to be the fyah man, then we all got to stick to the same fyah plan .

I'm sorry, I don't speak Reggae affectation. What is your point here? More stuff about how I'm hateful because I love Christ, the Word of God and the true light, and do not love those things that would separate us from Him?

Dzheremi,

Great posts (as usual)! Christians should not be imitating the false piety of Muslims, but should be imitating Christ and His saints.

Logged

"All that the Father has belongs likewise to the Son, except Causality." St. Gregory Nazianzen

"We should believe that divine grace is present in the icon of Christ and that it communicates sanctification to those who draw near with faith."St. Theodore Studite